... think ... including ... I seem to be perennially defending disfavored Python proposals, but here goes. I was quite relieved to see Guido's proposed colon...
n8spam@...
Mar 3, 2001 3:29 am
60
Hello. I am very new to python and find this discussion interesting as "iterators and generic functions" were the first thing that I marked as notably absent....
Clark C. Evans
cce@...
Mar 3, 2001 5:03 am
61
Another question, have people considerd "tuple" syntax? I actually find this more readable than colon syntax. for (key,_) in dict: for (_,value) in dict: for...
Clark C. Evans
cce@...
Mar 3, 2001 5:07 am
62
... for k in dict.keys(): for k,v in dict.items(): but with something more appropriate (using some lazy iteration protocol) instead of keys and items....
qrczak@...
Mar 3, 2001 9:36 am
63
From: <qrczak@...> ... Requires diferent evaluation of dict.keys() in diferent context. Maybe it was motivation for colon sintax, reserved for...
gzeljko
gzeljko@...
Mar 3, 2001 10:24 am
64
... Huh? That's exactly what was originally proposed in the PEP. Any callable object can serve as an iterator, since it is called to produce the next item....
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 3, 2001 10:43 am
65
From: Ka-Ping Yee <ping@...> ... Is this going to be supported in for-loop ? for target_list in expression_list: x = eval(expression_list) while 1: if...
gzeljko
gzeljko@...
Mar 3, 2001 11:26 am
66
... It does not. It would always be a lazy list, which provides both a sequence protocol and an iteration protocol. The iteration protocol could just reuse...
qrczak@...
Mar 3, 2001 11:59 am
67
... Here is a backward compatible proposal. The meaning of 'for x in seq: statement' is as follows: try: _tmp = seq.__iterator__() except AttributeError: _tmp...
qrczak@...
Mar 3, 2001 12:32 pm
68
... I can see that this would work, but i don't understand why you prefer while 1: body(iter[0]) iter = iter[1:] to while 1: # when a...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 3, 2001 12:42 pm
69
... Binding to tuples already has a well-defined meaning. blah = [(1, 2), (3, 4), (5, 6)] for (a, b) in blah: makes perfect sense, analogous to (a, b) = (1, 2)...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 3, 2001 12:45 pm
70
From: <qrczak@...> ... a=some_dict.keys() # a going to be 'list' In others words, they 'must' implement complete list interface, 1. without own...
gzeljko
gzeljko@...
Mar 3, 2001 1:14 pm
71
... The former uses an already existing interface. The latter is a new interface. The former doesn't mutate the iterator. Because of this a sequence itself can...
qrczak@...
Mar 3, 2001 2:21 pm
72
From: <qrczak@...> ... You can think about that in your own terms :) so: dict.keys = stateless lazy list dict.keys() = dict.keys.__call__() - to produce...
gzeljko
gzeljko@...
Mar 3, 2001 4:10 pm
73
... Oops. How quickly we forget. :-) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)...
Guido van Rossum
guido@...
Mar 3, 2001 4:14 pm
74
From: Guido van Rossum <guido@...> ... Thanks. There was some indications :) ly-y'rs-gzeljko...
gzeljko
gzeljko@...
Mar 3, 2001 5:05 pm
75
... I think comments similar to this have been made a few times now about the colon syntax for mapping iteration -- to paraphrase, "Why bother with the colons...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 4, 2001 1:56 am
76
Hi, everyone. I thank you all for your participation and for contributing your ideas on the issues surrounding iterators. I'm collecting some of the points...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 4, 2001 1:56 am
77
Just a note to remind those of you who are coming to the Python 9 conference in Long Beach: there will be a "birds-of-a-feather" (BOF) meeting about iterators...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 4, 2001 2:21 am
78
... It would be generally nice to be able to 'skip' items occuring within a tuple. Thus, the answer could be: for (key,) in spam: This is better since it is...
Clark C. Evans
cce@...
Mar 4, 2001 3:56 pm
79
... This syntax is ambiguous because this is unpacking of a 1-tuple. I wonder if the interpreter is allowed to optimize by translation of key,_ = spam to a...
qrczak@...
Mar 4, 2001 6:27 pm
80
... Wouldn't it be an error if it was anything but a two-tuple (or dictionary entry)? ;) Clark...
Clark C. Evans
cce@...
Mar 4, 2001 6:30 pm
81
... [(1, 2, 3), (4, 5, 6)] ... ... Traceback (innermost last): File "<interactive input>", line 1, in ? ValueError: unpack tuple of wrong size I don't...
Clark C. Evans
cce@...
Mar 4, 2001 6:32 pm
82
gzeljko wrote: ... NOT TRUE! People didn't complain (much) for the first 15 years because they didn't know any better! The instant that I discovered perl...
Michael Chermside
mcherm@...
Mar 6, 2001 12:18 am
83
From: Michael Chermside <mcherm@...> ... Don't take it so strict :) ... If one use strings for strings, End-s for End-s ... ... Never think there are...
Zoka
gzeljko@...
Mar 6, 2001 3:37 am
84
Hi all, I believe Guido has pretty much made up his mind on the subject of iterators and i wanted to inform you of the current plan. Here is my understanding...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 11, 2001 10:00 am
85
... I like it. Does it mean that there will be methods like xkeys and xitems which produce iterators instead of sequences? -- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk *...
qrczak@...
Mar 11, 2001 10:53 am
86
... Was there resolution on dictionaries? In particular, was the implicit tuple unpacking mechanism I described earlier considered as part of this solution. ...
Clark C. Evans
cce@...
Mar 11, 2001 10:56 am
87
... No. The issue of dictionary iteration was left separate (perhaps for a future PEP). Whether, and how, we would provide iterators on dictionaries and...
Ka-Ping Yee
ping@...
Mar 11, 2001 11:02 am
88
... You can't have this syntax, because it already means a different thing: unpacking 1-tuples. IMHO having explicit dictionary methods like xkeys and xitems...
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
